[soipguibbom]

Reducing our carbon dioxide levels may not be the only way to address climate change. Tiny particles in the atmosphere may be just as important.

More...

[OGOGOogoloshennya]

The cooling effect of sulphur particles was noted in the days after 9/11 when the grounding of all air traffic over the US and the subsequent drop in sulphides increased evaporation rates at monitoring stations in the USA. It only took a few days to notice the reduction in cooling that the sulphur particles produced.

The other noticed effect was that the reduction of sulphur particle pollution in Europe is believed to have worsened drought cycles in Africa.

Personally I think Crutzen's idea smacks of a certain desperation and is bandaid. Sulphur particles do come down and the reason there was such an effort to reduce sulphides in Europe was the environmental damage that acid rain was causing to both forests and old city buildings. Trading off types of environmental damage doesn't seem like a good idea and it takes very little time for the sulphur particles to end up back as acid rain. Meanwhile the CO2 and equivalents remain for a much longer time in the atmosphere. So masking a problem and creating another environmental problem at a time when there is greater stress on eco systems is hardly a long term solution to a long term problem.

[awagsFare]

Sulfur, sulfides...we should at least get the terminology correct.

We are certainly not talking about elemental sulfur. Nor would we be talking about sulfides.

The particles in question are sulfates. Why they refer to them as sulfur I do not know, but it is not a helpful terminology.